F, 



2 7 



/Ss Uf 



C /f^'j 



(if 



C 



59th Congress, ( SENATE. j Document 

1st Session. ) I No. 393. 



F 127 
.N8 US 
Copy 1 PRESERVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 



Mr. CuLLOM presented the following 

HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS IN 
REGARD TO THE PRESERVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 



April 21, 1906. — Ordered to be printed. 



Committee on Foreign Relations, 

United States Senate, 
Wcishington, D. C, Ap7'U 11, 1906. 

The committee met at 10.30 a. m. 

Present: Senators Cullom (chairman), Frye, Lodge, Foraker, 
Kean, Morgan, Bacon, Money ; Clark, of Montana, and McCreary. 

Mr. Isham G. Randolph and Mr. Robert R. McCormick appeared 
before the committee. 

The Chairman. The message of the President, containing certain 
recommendations relating to the preservation of Niagara Falls, was 
referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations on March 27, and is 
now pending before us. That message is accompanied by the report 
of the International Waterways Commission, appointed in pursuance 
of resolution of Congress, in which it is recommended that, pending 
the negotiation of a treaty with Great Britain, legislation be enacted 
limiting the diversion of waters tributary to Niagara Falls to 28,500 
cubic feet per second, of which amount the Chicago Drainage Canal 
is to be iDermitted to use 10,000 cubic feet per second. The report of 
the International Waterways Commission was brought to the atten- 
tion of officials of the sanitary district of Chicago, under whose super- 
vision the drainage canal is being operated. The officials of that 
district contend that they should not be limited to 10,000 cubic feet 
per second. The president of the district, Mr. McCormick, com- 
municated with me some days ago and asked that he be given a hear- 
ing before this committee. On the part of the committee I took the 
liberty of inviting him to appear here to-day. 

Mr.' McCormick and the chief engineer of the Chicago Drainage 
Canal, Mr, Randolph, are now before the committee prepared to 
submit their statements. 

Senator Money. Are there not two questions in regard to this 
waterwaj^^ — one in regard to the Illinois River, and the other in re- 
gard to the commercial problem? 

The CHAiRisrAN. The Chicago Drainage Canal is supplied from the 
waters of Lake Michigan, and the question is whether that diversion 
loAvers the water of Lake Michigan to such an extent as to have an 
appreciable effect on the flow of water passing over Niagara Falls. 

We will now hear Mr. McCormick, who represents the sanitary dis- 
trict of Chicago as its president. 



2 PEESERVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT R. McCORMICK, PRESIDENT OF THE 
SANITARY DISTRICT OF CHICAGO. 

Senator Forakek. You are a member of that board, are you, Mr. 
McCormick ? 

Mr. McCormick. I am president of th« board. 

Senator Foraker. What is the name of that board? 

Mr. McCormick. The sanitary district of Chicago, a municipahty. 

Senator Foraker. Is it a board created by State statute, or by an 
ordinance ? 

The Chairman. By a State statute. 

Mr. McCormick (in reply to Senator Bacon). The map you have 
before you does not show the boundaries of the district. I think we 
have a map that does. 

Senator Foraker. That does show the kicality from Lake Mich- 
igan. 

Mr. McCormick. It shows where the canal is now running. This 
is a map of the present canal, and this one of the proposed canal. 

The Chairjian. Go on, Mr. McCormick. 

Mr. McCormick. Perhaps I might state, Senator, for the informa- 
tion of the members of the committee, what the sanitary district is. 
In a Avord, it is a municipality which embraces all of Chicago and a 
good deal of the surrounding territory, which territory is taxed for 
the work done by the district, all of which is drainage work. It is 
governed by trustees elected by the j^eople. 

The Chairman. For general information you might state how 
much money you have spent there. 

Mr. McCormick. We have spent over $48,000,000, have we not, 
Mr. Randolph ? 

Mr. Randolph. Forty-nine million dollars and some hundred thou- 
sand. 

Mr. McCormick. And we will have to spend nearly $16,000,000 
more. 

Senator Foraker. You have spent $49,000,000 on this drainage 
canal, that is marked as the principal canal? 

Mr. McCormick. Yes, sir. 

Senator Foraker. This part indicated here, leading down to Lake 
Calumet, has not ^^et been constructed? 

Mr. McCormick. No. We are working on that now — planning to 
raise the money and buying the right of way. 

Senator Foraker. You have spent part of the $49,000,000 on 
that, have you, or all of it on the other ? 

Mr. McCormick. We have spent it on the new work in one sense. 
There [pointing] is the old Illinois and Michigan Canal, and before 
we can construct the Calumet Canal we have to make a substitute for 
the Illinois-Michigan Canal by building a lock at Joliet and con- 
necting our canal with the old one there, and we are spending money 
on that work. 

Senator Foraker. What river is it at Joliet? 

Mr. McCormick. The Desplaines, as far as you see it. It empties 
into the Illinois River below. 

Senator Foraker. That empties into the Illinois? 

Mr. McCormick. It empties into the Illinois about 20 mrles south 
of Joliet. 



PEESERVATION OF NIAGAEA FALLS. 3 

Senator Lodge. And then goes to the Mississippi? 

Mr. McCoKMicK. Then it goes on to the Mississippi. It is quite 
a significant fact that wliere the Desplaines River, whicli carries the 
Chicago sewage, meets tlie Illinois the Desplaines is the cleaner of 
the two. 

Senator Foraker. Is that where the fish are? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. There are a few fish there. 

Senator Foraker. I see that since they turned the sewage in there 
the fish have come back to live in the river. They made that point 
in the argument before the Supreme Court. 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. In the proposed limitation by the engineers they 
have classed together the Chicago Drainage Canal and- two power 
corporations at Niagara Falls, and have recommended that the dis- 
trict — that is, Chicago — be limited to 10,000 cubic feet per second 
flow, and that one of the power companies be limited to 9,500 and the 
other one to 8,600. 

The Chairman. Yes; here are the figures. This report is made 
by Ernst, Clinton, and Wisner, and it recommends that the Niagara 
Falls Hydraulic Power and Manufacturing Company be authorized 
to divert 9.500 cubic feet ; the Niagara Falls Power Company, 8,f)00 : 
the Erie Canal or its tenants, in addition to lock service, 400, and 
the Chicago Drainage Canal, 10,000. 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. Ten thousand is not enough to conserve the 
health of Chicago and the flow through the Illinois Valley to the 
Mississippi. 

We do not want to ap])ear to take the position of preventing legis- 
lation to help Niagara Falls. I think Chicago people probably see 
more of Niagara Falls than Boston people do, Senator Lodge, because 
they go to Boston more often than your people come our way, and they 
stop at Niagara on the way; but we do think that the health of the 
people and the commerce of the Mississippi watershed ought to be 
put before the beauty of the falls, and that it ought not to be classed 
on a par with a purely profit-making corporation. 

If it had been possible to avoid it, we never would have dug this 
canal. Nobody w^anted to dig it. It has already cost us $50,000,000. 
We did not want to spend the money, but it was the only way engi- 
neers could devise to drain Chicago. In the old days, wdien sewage 
went out in the lake, it came back in the drinking Avater and caused 
a tyjDhoid epidemic every year, so the drainage canal was dug. It 
has cost nearlv $50,000,000 to-dav, and, as I have said, must cost 
$15,000,000 more to complete. 

Senator Foraker. What are the dimensions of that canal? 

Mr. McCoRBriCK. The <?limensions vary in different places, accord- 
ing to the structure of the soil. Through the solid-rock cuts it is 160 
feet wide by 22 feet deep. 

Senator Foraker. Where is that? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. I wish Mr. Randolph would show that. 

Mr. Randolph. That begins at Willow Springs and extends 14.95 
miles to Lockport. 

The Chairman. And it will not be extended ? 

Mr. Randolph. We are extending that channel 4 miles. 

The Chairman. That is rock also, is it not ? 

Mr. Randolph. That is, betAveen walls. Part of it is through rock 
but a good portion of it is between walls. 



4 PEESERVATION OF JSTIAGAEA FALLS. 

Senator I^Ioxey. This is intended as a navigable canal as well as a 
drainage canal ? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. 

Senator Bacon. Is it navigated ? 

Mr. Randolph. It is navigable. 

Senator Bacon. It is navigable, but is it practically navigated? 

Mr. Randolph. It is principally used by the people in the stone 
business. 

Senator Bacon. You speak of this particular section being 22 feet. 
Wliat is the shallowest part ? 

Mr. IMcCoRMicK. Twenty-two feet is the shallowest part of the 
canal an v where. 

Senator Money. Do you mean the water would be 22 feet deep? 

Mr. McCoRikiicK. It is 22 feet to-day. 

Senator Money. That is as much as any canal boat will draw. 

Senator Lodge. That is a great depth, of course. 

Senator Foraker. I see one point there marked " summit." That 
is not a very high altitude, I suppose, is it? 

Mr. McCoRMicK. That is the summit between Lake Michigan 
watershed and the Desplaines watershed. 

Senator Foraker. It is not very high, is it ? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. No; only a few feet. 

Senator Foraker. There is no lock in the canal, is there? 

Mr. McCor:\iick. Not a lock ; no, sir. It is all gravity flow. 

The canal is being built in four sections, the first of which is 
already completed. The rock cut Senator Foraker spoke of is com- 
pleted" in its entirety, because when the district was digging the rock 
section it appeared advisable to build for all time. 

Senator Foraker. Is it simply solid rock ? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. Most of it is " rock wall," and in some places it 
is riprap, as you can see by this picture. Up to Willow Springs it is 
finished for all time, and has a capacity for 14,000 cubic feet per sec- 
ond, the amount we ask for. The money has been spent to provide 
for that amount. 

Senator Bacon. Is this a picture of the rock cut? 

Mr. McCoRMicK. Yes, sir. 

Senator Bacon. Before the water was turned in ? 

Mr. McCoRMicK. Before the water was turned in. 

Senator Bacon. That is what I thought. 

Mr. McCoRaiiCK. In the earth sections they figured it would be 
cheaper to put in what flow was needed then, and as the demand in- 
creased to Aviden the canal by dredging. The first division is finished 
now, which accommodates a flow of 6,000 cubic feet in the main 
branch of the Chicago River, down the south branch, and through the 
canal. An intercepting sewer has been built at Thirty-ninth street, 
Chicago, to take the sewifge of the southern section of the city over to 
the canal. It will add another 200,000 cubic feet, making 800,000 
cubic feet of flow doAvn the canal. 

The Chairman. You are not actually using at present the amount 
that this report would give 3' ou ? 

Mr. McCoR:\ricK. No, sir; and we will not for some years; but 
Ave know that a treaty Avith England is something that can not be 
turned OA^er at Avill. In a treaty Ave should be proAdded for for all 
time. 



PKESERVATION OF NIAGAKA FALLS. 5 

Senator Foraker. This legislation is only proposed subject to 
treaty, of course ? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The object of the report is to get a bill passed to 
last for two years. 

Senator Lodge. Yes; to last for three years; and if the treaty is 
made sooner the legislation lapses. 

Senator McCreary. Mr. Chairman, will you now state, if you 
please, the question before the committee? I have just come in. 

The Chairman. You will find the basis of the action proposed to be 
taken now is in this report of the American members of the Inter- 
national Waterways Commission, limiting the amount of water sup- 
ply to be taken from Niagara Falls — for instance, by the Chicago 
Drainage Canal, to 10,000 feet per second, is it not? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. That is the proposed limit. We are asking to 
have it raised to 14,000 cubic feet per second. 

Senator McCreary. And we are looking to the preservation of 
Niagara Falls? 

The Chairman. Yes ; and at the same time not cutting off Chicago, 
which has been digging a canal at a cost of $50,000,000, from its 
right to a sufficient amount of water in that canal for all purposes 
hereafter. 

Senator Money. Hoav far is it from Chicago to Niagara Falls? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. By water, I do not know. I think it is about 
TOO miles by rail. 

vSenator Lodge. It reduces the amount of water going over the 
falls. 

Senator McCreary. The water you desire is from Lake Michigan, 
I suppose? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. Yes ; the southern end of Lake Michigan. 

Senator Lodge. The report says : 

Works are now authorized and pax'tially completed at the falls which will 
divert from the Niagara River, above the falls, about 27 per cent of the average 
discharge and about 33 per cent of the low-water discharge, which is more than 
double the quantity now flowing over the American fall. 

Senator Bacon. What is the current or the rapidity of the Chi- 
cago Canal? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. The War Department has limited the current of 
the Chicago River to 1^ miles an hour. 

Senator Bacon. You say it lias limited it to that? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. Yes; it does not allow us to cause a greater cur- 
rent than 1| miles an hour in the Chicago Hiver. 

Senator Bacon. They do not permit you to so operate your canal 
as to create a current of greater rapidity than IJ miles an hour? 

Mr. McCoRMicK. No, sir. 

Senator Bacon. Because formerly the current was in the opposite 
direction ? 

Mr. McCoRMiCK. There was practically no current. At certain 
seasons there was a current toward the lake. 

Senator Foraker. Are you building the drainage canal under 
some act of Congress? 

Mr. McCor:5Iick. No, sir ; under a right from the State of Illinois. 

Senator Foraker. That is what I have always understood; but 
how does the Secretary of War have anything to do with it? 



6 PRESERVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 

Mr. McCoRMicK. Because the Chicag:o River is a navigable stream. 
If we made too ra])id a flow of water down the Chicago River, it 
would interfere with commerce. p i i i » 

The Chairman. And take more water per second out ot the hike i 

Mr. McCoRMicK. Yes, sir. 

Senator Money. I introduced a bill this session providing tor a 
waterway down the canal and on into the Mississippi Eiver m the 
interest of communication, not in the interest of drainage. At that 
time we did not have aiiv romantic views about Niagara Falls. We 
did not think it Avas goiiig to interfere with Niagara Falls. In fact, 
we were not thinking of it at all. 

Senator Lodge. According to this report, if the committee will per- 
mit me to read it, the total quantity of water to be taken from the 
river by Avorks now authorized— they are not all completed— amounts 
to G0,900 cubic feet per second : 

Of this amount. 26.700 caibic feet is to be tal^cen on tlie American side and the 
remainder. .'^4.200 cubic feet, on the Canadian side— that is. 27 per cent of 
the averase discharge and 33 per cent of tlie lo\v-\Yater discharge of the 
Niagara Kiver will cease to pass over the falls when these works are com- 
pleted and in full operation. The quantity to be diverted is more than double 
the qnantitv which now passes over the American fall, wliich. at the average 
stage, is about 27.800 cubic feet. That this will, in general, have an injurious 
effect upon the falls seems self-evident. The volume of water to be diverted 
is about the equivalent of the entire discharge of Lake Superior over the Sault 
Ste. Marie. The amount thus far actually diverted is but 17.800 cubic feet 
per second, and has had an appreciable effect upon the falls. To foretell with 
accuracy the effects in detail of the full diversion authorized would require 
a more complete knowledge of the betl of the river than is now obtainable. 
The water taken on the Canadian side below the crest of the rapids will affect 
the horseshoe fall alone. If all that taken on the American side should affect 
the American fall alone it woidd practically leave it dry. 

The Chairman. Beginning at page IT, there are two pages of man- 
ufacturing establishments that are proposing to take advantage of 
the falls, and, of course, if everybody's manufacturing establishment 
relies on the falls it Avould be dry. 

Senator Lodge. The falls would be gone. Of course they do not 
propose to stop the operation of the Chicago Drainage Canal. It is 
only a question of the amount of water to be allowed. 

Mr. ]McCor:mick. I am suggesting that avb should not be put on a 
par with these manufacturing companies. To finish our scheme, on 
which $50,000,000 has already been spent, to get the absolutely nec- 
essary flow from South Chicago for the diversion of the Calumet 
Eiver, will take 4,000 cubic feet 

Senator Bacon. You are going to put that canal here [indicating] ? 

Mr. McCoRMicK. Yes, sir; the red line there. It will reverse the 
Calumet River. 

Senator McCreary. What is the length of the canal ? 

Mr. Randolph. The finished portion is 28.05 miles. We are ex- 
tending that now 4 miles farther. The Chicago River, taken in con- 
nection with what we have already done, makes 34 miles of naviga- 
ble channel. 

Senator Foraker. That is, from Lake Michigan to Lockport ? 

Mr. Randolph. To Lockport. 

Senator Foraker. Is 34 miles? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. 



PEESERVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 7 

Senator Frye. Mv. McCormick proposes that we allow the (^aiial 
to take more than the board recommends. 

The CHAimiAN. They want the amonnt to be increased to 11,000 
cubic feet per second. 

Mr. JMcCoRMiCK. Fourteen thousand, exclusive of locka<i-e. 

Senator Bacon. Is this canal to be extended to the Calumet Eiver? 

Mr. McCormick. Yes, sir. 

Senator Bacon. That is not navigable? 

Mr. McCormick. It will be. It is navigable part way now. Con- 
gTess has spent a good deal of money upon it. It is navigable, but I 
do not know how far up. 

Mr. Randolph. It is navigable now to Chittenden Bridge, and ap- 
propriations have been made for still further improvements. 

Senator Lodge. The report excepts service of the locks, I see. 

Mr. McCormick. Our case is not mentioned, I think. The Erie 
Canal and the Welland Canal are mentioned. 

Senator Lodge. The report says: 

As a step in that direction we recommend that legislation he enacted which 
shall contain the followins; provisions, viz : 

((/) The Secretary of War to he authorized to grant permits for the diver- 
sion of 2S..")(iO cuhic feet per second, and no more, from the waters naturally 
tribntarv to Niagara Falls, distributed as follows: 

Cubic feet. 

Niagara Falls Il.vdraulic Power and Manufacturing Company 0,500 

Niagara P^nlls IViwer Compan.v 8,600 

Erie Canal or its tenants (in addition to lock service) 400 

Chicago Drainage Canal 10,000 

(h) All other diversion of water which is natural to Niagara Falls to be 
]irohibited. except such as may be req-uired for domestic use or for the service 
of locks in navigation canals. 

Mr. McCor:mick. I had not noticed that^^ 

Senator Lodge. That would cover that point, of course, because 
yours is going to be a navigation canal as well as a drainage canal.- 
So that would except your locks. 

Mr. McCoR^riCK. Yes; I had not noticed that before.. 

There is a bill pending in Congress now for a deep waterway from 
Chicago to St. Louis 

Senator Frye. Has any ascertainment been made as to how much 
that would reduce Lake Michigan? 

Mr. McCormick. Mr. Randolph can answer that. I think he says 
not at all. 

Mr. Randolph. That question has been under discussion for a great 
many years. The suit of St. Louis compelled us to open this channel 
in the winter months, in January, when the Lakes are at their lowest 
state. Observations extending over forty-odd years show that the 
Lakes are something like a foot higher in midsummer than in the 
winter months. We opened this channel on the ITth of January, 1900. 
After that the lake rose to its maximum the following summer. 
There has been a period of high water in the Lakes ever since. There 
is a theory that the high w^ater in the Lakes comes in cycles of four- 
teen years, an ascending scale for seven years and a descending scale 
for seven years. We seem to be now on the ascending scale. The 
Lakes have been higher from the time we opened the canal up to the 
present time. This winter they have been unusually high for the win- 
ter season, so that we are e^^idently on the ascending scale. The only 



8 PRESERVATION OF ]SriAGARA FALLS. 

guess that anybody has made is that the eventual lowering of the 
Lakes by this method will be possibly 6 inches ; but no method which 
has been adopted yet has been able to determine that question, because 
of the oscillation of the Lakes. We have that at Chicago— an oscilla- 
tion of as much as 4 feet in a day, owing to the wind. 

Senator Lodge. Do you know whether they have calculated to show 
that this diminishes the water over the falls — that is, I mean taking 
out the actual diminution of the falls, taking out what may be 
accounted for by the local power company, that it then shows this 
diminution of the Chicago Drainage Canal? 

Mr. Randolph. No, sir; there has been no scientific demonstration 
of that fact at all; no scientific demonstration of the ainount of 
water that passes from Lake Michigan into the St. Clair River. 

Senator Lodge. That is what I wanted to get at. 

Senator Foraker. Has there been any indication of the diminu- 
tion of the Waaler in the channel of the St. Clair River? 

Mr. Randolph. There has not. There is no indication of that up 
to the present time. 

Senator Bacon. Has there been an investigation made to see 
whether or not that river has become smaller? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. The Government is having constant 
gauge readings taken. It has been having them for several years. 
The question is in the hands of the Engineer Department, with head- 
quarters at Detroit. 

Senator Bacon. Naturally that would be the case under the con- 
ditions you mention, where the lake itself had not lowered. Of course 
if the lake had not been lowered by the withdrawal of the water for 
the Chicago Canal the St. Clair River water would not be lowered 
either. 

Mr. Randolph. No. 

Senator Bacon. But if the apprehension we now entertain, that 
ultimately it will result in the lowering to the extent of 6 inches, is 
realized, it must necessarily affect the St. Clair River in the same 
degree. 

Mr. Randolph. Certainly. 

Senator Bacon. That is\he only supply of the St. Clair River, is 
it not? 

Mr. Randolph. The St. Clair takes its supply from Lake Superior, 
Lake Huron, and Lake Michigan. 

The Chairman. Mr. Randolph, if Mr. McCormick is through I 
would like to have you take up this subject and make a statement in 
regard to it. 

Mr. McCormick. I would just like to finish what I have to say, 
gentlemen. 

The Chair:man. Finish what you have to say. 

Mr. McCormick. I think Mr. JRandolph will show you in a moment 
that whatever flow we take doAvn the canal alone is very small in com- 
parison to the amount that goes through the St. Clair 'River, perhaps 
one-fifteenth of it. I have forgotten the figures. We have begun 
our work with the idea of flowing 14,000 cubic feet through the iSck 
section. When the Chicago River is finished it will be flowing 8,000 
cubic feet, which will come from as far north as Waukeo;an. 'it will 
take 4,000 to reverse the flow of the Calumet River and "^,000 to take 
care of the Thirty-ninth street sewer, making a total of 14,000, as 



PEESERVATION" OF NIAGARA FALLS. 9 

opposed to 10,000 suggested by the engineers and 9,500 proposed by 
them for a private power company. 

Senator Money. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. McCor- 
mick one or two questions before he leaves the stand. 

The Chair^fan. Certainly. 

Senator Money. Mr. McCormick, what is the water area of Lakes 
Su^Derior, Huron, Michigan, St. Clair, and Erie? 

Mr. McCormick. I can not answer that. 

Senator Money. Has anvbodv put anything before the committee 
that will show that? 

The Chairman. It is likely Mr. Randolph can answer it. 

Mr. Randolph. I do not recall it now. 

Senator Money. I ask that because the evaporation on that area 
must be enormous, and I want to make a calculation, or you engi- 
neers could do it, as to how much 4,000 more cubic feet per second 
would evaporate out of the whole surface. Here are two extreme 
points on the lake. It is not like taking out 4,000 feet as though it 
were taken out here at Niagara and diverted back this way. In other 
words, 3^our 14,000 feet have to undergo the effect of your evapo- 
ration in going a distance of 2,000 miles, is it, by water, altogether? 

Mr. Randolph. No, sir; it is about TOO miles. 

Senator Money. It is TOO miles by land, is it not? 

Mr. Randolph. About 5T6 miles by land from Chicago to Buffalo, 
and it must be about 800 by water. 

Senator Money. That can not be right. The land transportation 
is almost a straight line. The water goes up here the whole length of 
Michigan, through the Straits of Mackinac, down through the St. 
Clair River, and then down through Lake Erie before you reach the 
Niagara River. It must be a tremendous distance. 

The Chairman. You mean the distance the water travels before it 
reaches Niagara Falls? 

Senator Money. Yes. I supposed somebody in studying this prob- 
lem had estimated the amount of evaporation. AVithout having 
studied it all, at first blush I would say that the loss of ten, fourteen, 
or twenty thousand gallons (cubic feet?) a second, diverted here at 
this extreme point, would have no appreciable effect upon the dis- 
charge at Niagara, counting the evaporation. 

Senator Foraker. But is not evaporation determined by the area, 
and will not the area, after they have withdrawn the water for this 
drainage canal, be practically the same as it was before? Therefore, 
does evaporation enter into it at all? 

Senator Money. I understand that. I do not want to take up too 
much time, but I am interested in commerce. A bill has been intro- 
duced to make a waterway for commercial purposes from Chicago to 
St. Louis. When it gets to St. Louis, then my State is provided for 
on the lower Mississippi. Senator McCreary's State is provided for, 
and a good many others. Here is an enormous lake going up this 
way and coming down this way, and so on down to Niagara. If 
there are 14,000 feet taken from this point 

Senator Foraker. . At Chicago ? 

Senator Money. At Niagara. And taken over here by some means 
and discharged, you would have a very appreciable effect upon 
Niagara Falls ; but you take it off here 

Senator Foraker. At the Chicago point? 



10 PKESEEVATION OF NIAGAEA FALLS. 

Senator Money. At the Chicago point. I say that l-t.OOO will not 
be appreciable when you consider the eva]ioration over that extended 
area of water. 

Mr. Eaxdolph. The evaporation is about one one-hundredth of a 
foot per day. 

The Chairman. You may finish what you have to say, Mr. Mc- 
Cormick. 

Mr. McCoRiMicK. In considering- the flow of w^ater we must think 
of not only Chicago, but also the people down the Illinois Valley and 
down the Mississippi River. If Congress should limit us to a too 
small floAv, then our water going down the canal would be a foul 
stream and create great hardship upon the people in the Illinois 
Valley. Probably it would give Missouri another cause for an in- 
junction against us. You know, when the Sui^reme Court dismissed 
the petition for an injunction, it held that Missouri had shown no 
damage by means of our stream ; but if we are not allowed to increase 
the size of the stream and yet increase the population, then a cause of 
action will arise, and Missouri will be allowed to enjoin Chicago and 
close up the canal. 

Senator Lodge. Let me ask you another question, which is suggested 
to me by what this report says. It seems to me as if they did not 
intend to cut down the Chicago Drainage Canal. I mean they meant 
to allow enough for that, and the cutting was to come where I think it 
ought to come, on the power companies. They say : 

The Chicago Drainage Canal, constructed under the authority of the State of 
Illinois, was designed to divert about 10,000 cubic feet per second of water 
which would naturally flow over Niagara Falls. It has not been fully com- 
pleted, but it now has a capacity of about .5,000 cubic feet per second. The 
amount which it is actually diverting has thus far been limited by the Secretary 
of War to about 4.200 cul)ic feet per second. 

That would indicate that they thought when they allowed 10,200 
cubic feet they were alloAving all that was desired, because they say it 
was designed to divert 10,000 feet. I do not think their intention was 
to cut you down. 

Mr. jNIcCormick. That is true. The original plan was for 10,000 
feet, but when after developments showed that 14.000 feet were nec- 
essary the ])lan was changed. 

Senator Bacon. How much are vou using now? 

]Mr. :\IcCoRMicK. Between 5,000'and 0,000 feet. 

Senator Bacon. That raises a question I would like to ask Mr. 
Randolph. Is this estimate you speak of, regarding the ultimate 
effect on the water in Lake Michigan, reducing it G inches, based upon 
the present consumption or upon the 10.000 feet? 

jNIr. Randolph. It is based upon the 10,000 cubic feet. 

Senator Bacon. Y\"ith 14,000, the estimate, I suppose, would be 
somewhere between 8 and 9 inches? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir; it would be in proportion. 

Senator Bacon. Do you not consider that ]:)retty serious, reducing 
the surface of a large body of water like Lake Michigan 8 to 9 inches? 
That is an immense volume of water. 

Senator Kean. You would not do that in twenty-four hours? 

Senator Bacon. No ; that would be the ]Dermanent effect. In other 
words, when the canal gets to running 14,000 cubic feet per second 
the effect upon that when it comes down to its regular operation 



PRESEEVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 11 

would be a permanent loAvering-, varied of course by the season and 
the water supply, the snows, etc., between 8 and 9 inches. ' 

Mr. Randolph. As I said before, gentlemen, there has been no 
scientific demonstration of that at all. It has been about the best 
guess anybody has been able to make on it. 

Senator Bacox. Do you think that is approximately correct ? 

Mr. Randolph. No, sir; I do not. I do not believe it. I do not 
see how the w^ithdrawal of 4| j^er cent o*f the floAv which passes 
through the St. Clair River can possibly have that eifect. It is only 
taking about 4^ per cent. 

Senator Bacon. What is the estimate of the amount of water flow- 
ing through the St. Clair River? 

Mr. Randolph. It is approximately slightly over 200,000 cubic feet 
per second. 

Senator Bacon. This would amount to -1^ per cent of it ? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes. 

Mr. McCoRMicK. Senator Money, and Congressman Madden, of 
Chicago, have introduced bills into Congress for a deep waterway, 
and an}^ limit you put on water for the canal will be a limit on the 
waterway, a waterway which will affect not only the Illinois Valley 
and the Mississippi River, but all the navigable streams that are 
running into the Mississippi River. We believe the waterway is a 
perfectly feasible scheme, and think it would be too bad that the 
success of such an undertaking should be limited by means of a treaty 
with England. 

I want to repeat that the Chicago Drainage Canal is a drainage 
proposition. It is not a matter of putting private gain over the pub- 
lic good at Niagara. It is the only w^ay to preserve the health of 
Chicago and to have a clean flow of water down the Illinois River. 
We think it ought to be put away ahead of any power company 
located at Niagara Falls. It is not Avithin our province to suggest 
the limit to be put upon the water to be diverted at Niagara, but we 
think you ought to give us what we need — 14,000 cubic feet — and 
what is left over, divide among the people who are making money 
out of it, if you will. 

Senator Bacon. You said something just now about an estimate 
for a power company. Is not that at Chicago? 

Mr. McCoRaTOK. No, sir ; that is at Niagara Falls. 

Senator Bacon. You mentioned the tAvo in such close connection 
that, while I did not interrupt you at the time, I was Avondering Avhy 
there should be any connection. 

Mr. McCoRiMiCK. Tlie engineers, in their suggestion that 28,000 
cubic feet be diA^erted on the American side, proj^ose that 9,500 be 
allotted to the Niagara Falls PoAver Company, 8,600 to another com- 
pany, and 10,000 to the Chicago Drainage Canal, putting all on an 
equality, which we do not think should be done. 

Senator Lodge. What Avould run the falls dry are those poAver 
companies, built and building, right near the falls. I do not believe 
this canal Avill have that effect. 

Senator McCreary. I Avould like to haA^e you state, Mr. McCor- 
mick, the quantity of Avater already taken from the Niagara RiA^er by 
the private Avorks. 

Senator Lodge. Sixty thousand cubic feet. 



12 PEESERVATIOlSr OF NIAGAEA FALLS. 

Senator Money. I do not care what you do with the private works. 
So far as I am concerned, von conld stop them all to-morrow and con- 
demn them for the pnblic benefit. But this thing of cutting off the 
supply of water at the end which can not affect appreciably that 
flow at all, which would stop drainage and also stop the plan I have 
here — I think it should not be done. 

Senator Lodge. Then the health of a great community is also 
involved in this? 

Senator Money. Yes; that should be put above the gains of a 
stock company at Niagara Falls. They are not to be considered 
together in the same season of the year. 

Mr. JNIcCoRMiCK. We do not want to take 14.000 cubic feet. We 
do not want to take a foot if we can help it. It is terribly expensive, 
and we do not want to take any more than we have to take. 

Senator Money. I appreciate your situation, but I feel a particu- 
lar and special interest in the transportation routes to Chicago from 
my State. We have railroads now, but we want to sort of correct 
and govern the railroads by providing for water transportation. 

Senator Morgan. Mr. McCormick, what is the status of the pro- 
posed ship canal between the Allegheny River and Pittsburg? 

Mr. McCormick. I believe a corporation has been formed and has 
been granted certain rights and privileges. I do not know what they 
are. 

Senator Foraker. That bill has passed the House and has been 
considered in the Senate Committee on Commerce. I am not sure 
but what that committee has reported it. 

Senator Lodge. AAT:iat is that? 

Senatcir Foraker. The incorporation of a company under an act 
of Congress to build a ship canal from Ashtabula or some point near 
there down to Pittsburg, making a further drainage of water from 
Lake Erie, but it will be a lock canal. How much water they pro- 
pose to take off I do not know. 

Senator Frye. That has been reported and is on the calendar. 

Senator Bacon. If it is a lock canal, it will not take out much 
water. 

Senator Money. If it is a lock canal, it has to have feeders along 
the route. 

Senator Foraker. It does have feeders. I think it mentions a lot 
of tributary streams. 

The Chairman. As we have not much time left, perhaps we had 
better let Mr. McCormick get through. 

Senator Foraker. This is very interesting, and I think it is a very 
important subject. We can keep these gentlemen here until we get 
through. 

Mr. McCormick. That is all I have to say. I want to call the 
attention of Senator INIoney to the fact that his ship canal would not 
be possible if it were not for the drainage canal. 

Senator Money. I understand that. Mine, however, is not a ship 
canal. It is for water transportation. I know very well the effect 
your scheme has ujdou it, but it is simply an enlargement of your 
benevolent scheme for health, to give us cheap transportation in the 
southern ])art of the JSIississippi Valley. 

Senator Foraker. Will not 22 feet be enough for you. Senator ? 

Senator Money. Certainly it will. 



PRESEEVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. ' 13 

Senator Foraker. I understand that is the present depth. 
Mr. McCoRMiCK. We have 22 feet in the Chicago Drainage Canal. 
After we get out in the Illinois and Mississippi rivers we have no 
connection witli that. 

Senator Moxey. That is all right, as far as the canal goes, but the 
amount of water that is sent from the western end of the canal may 
not be sufKcient to fill the Illinois River. That varies in depth and 
width and has all the incidents to any stream, silt bearing and liable 
to deposit silt, which is held in suspension one day and then taken 

■1 away and shifted about. 

J Senator Morgan. Have the works at Niagara, driven by water, 

^ reduced the level of the lake or lakes to any perceptible degree ? 

Mr. ISIcCoRMicK. I do not know, sir. That is away off from our 
part of the country. 

■ Senator Lodge. They ha^^e reduced the flow of the Falls 33 per cent. 

J Mr. jMcCor:mick. Mr. Eandolph can answer that question. 

i Senator Morgan. I just wanted to know whether it had been dem- 

I onstrated that the works there have reduced the level of the Falls at 

'; all ; and if so, how much. 

4 The Chairman. Mr. Randolph, gentlemen, is a verj^ eminent engi- 

; neer and is familiar with the facts. We will now hear him. 

STATEMENT OF ISHAM G. RANDOLPH, ENGINEER IN CHIEF OF 
I THE CHICAGO DRAINAGE CANAL. 

1 Mr. Randolph. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I wall either talk 
'* right along and tell you my story, or answer questions, whichever you 
. prefer. 

I Senator jNIoney. Tell your story first. 
I The Chariman. Yes ; that will be better. 

i Mr. Randolph. The Sanitary District Canal in Chicago is the out- 

s come of its necessities. The water supplj^ of Chicago is taken from 

Lake Michigan. For many, many years its sewage was discharged 

I into its drinking reservoir. This created a condition of health in 

'^ Chicago wdiich was deplorable. The Chicago River was an open 

sewer, which stank to heaven. The flow from the river, when it had 

any flow, was into the lake. It was merely a ditch into which the 

water came as the lake rose and fell with the winds, with flood waters 

in flood times dragging all the sewage out into the lake. The intakes 

for the Chicago water suppl}' Avere placed 4 miles in the lake, and 

floods drove the polluted waters of the river out to those intakes and 

they were sucked back again into the water supply. 

This condition of things became so unbearable that as far back as 
1885 a commission was appointed to determine what should be done 
to relieve Chicago. Mr. Rudolph, of Philadelphia, was the head of 

that commission. His associates were Mr. Benjamin F. , Mr. 

Samuel , and Mr. R. E. Cooley. These gentlemen gave the 

whole subject-matter very exhaustive study and made a report w^hicli, 
unfortunately, never saw the light in print. It was many years be- 
fore I had access to anything which gave me any idea of what they 
had reported, but I finally got hold of one of their preliminary re- 
ports, which showed that they at first considered the propriety of 
putting a great intercepting sewer, in which would collect in the 
waters of the Chicago River all the sewage of Chicago and convey it. 



14 * PEESERVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 

to the southeast, where it would be dumped into the lake, and at the 
southern extremity of the lake. 

Senator Morgan. Of Lake Michigan? . , 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. The intakes were all to be removed to 
the north of the Chicago River, so as to divorce the source of pollu- 
tion and the source of supply as far as possible. An alternative to 
this was the same intercepting sewer with a great irrigation farm, 
in which all this sewage was to be dumped. 

The cost of that proposition was about $75,000,000, and the annual 
cost of maintenance was $2,000,000. 

The third alternative was the reversal of the flow of the water of 
the river, discharging its waters into the Desplaines River in the 
vicinity of Lockport. 

The" result of this agitation was that in 1889 what is known as 
the sanitary-district law was passed by the State of Illinois. This 
provided for the formation of sanitary districts. It was a general 
law, although it was well known when it was passed that it would 
have but one feasible application, and that would be for the city of 
Chicago. This law provided for the cutting of the channel from 
Chicago, the reversion of the flow of the Chicago River, and dis- 
charging its waters into the Desplaines River. 

At that time the cross section of the Chicago River was only suffi- 
cient to accommodate a flow of about 150,000 cubic feet per second. 
Its channel w^as designed for a flow of 600,000 cubic feet per second. 
The supply of this channel had to be through the Chicago River. 
Therefore this improvement was imperative. 

The plan adopted Avas to widen that river to 200 feet and deepen 
it to 2G feet. That improvement has gone ahead until it is now 
within about 25 per cent of completion. One bar to its completion 
is the existence of the three tunnels crossing the river, wdiose depth 
is only about 17 feet. They allow navigation of only 17 feet. 

Even that cross section, under the restrictions placed upon it by 
the Secretary of War, provided for a flow of only 480,000 cubic feet 
per minute at a velocity of 11 miles per hour. To get the other 120,000 
a conduit was built across the city on the line of Thirty-ninth street. 
That conduit has to be supplied by pumping. The pumping plant 
is nearly completed. It will be in operation about the 1st of August. 
In that plant there are four pumps for pumping sewage and two 
pumps for pumping the flow of water. These are the largest pumps 
ever seen by man. Each pump will throw 40,000 cubic feet of water 
per minute. 

Senator Money. How many gallons is that? 

Mr. Randolph. That is 300,000 gallons a minute. So for the 
Chicago River and the seM^age that pours into it provision is made 
for diverting it all from the lake by intercepting sewers running 
along the lake front, both north and south, those on the north run- 
ning to an intercepting sewer on Lawrence avenue, where it will be 
pumped into the north branch of the Chicago River, come down, and 
be pumped into the main branch and flow south. But that does not 
relieve the southern portion of the city and its suburban neighbors, 
which lie on the south of the zone which will be affected by the works 
we have projected. The Calumet region is fast settling up. It is 
going to be a populous and a sewage-creating community. That 
sewage now discharges into the Calumet River. It is just as neces- 



PRESERVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 15 

sary for the protection of the heaUh of Chicago that the Cahimet 
Eiver shoiikl be diverted as that the Chicago River should be di- 
verted. At the hist session of the legishitnre a bill was introduced 
authorizing the diversion of the Calumet River. That diversion is 
shown in the dotted red line upon the map. 

To carry out what is necessary for Chicago's health it requires 
10,000 cubic feet of water per second through the Chicago River, and 
it will require 4.000 cubic feet i^er second through the Calumet River, 
giving a combined flow of 14,000 cubic feet per second. 

The work of the district, while primarily for sewage purposes, has 
provided the finest artificial waterway which man has yet built. The 
standard cross section of that channel is 200 feet wide^on the bottom* 
Its minimum depth of flow is '22 feet. It varies from 22 to 24 or 25 
feet, according to the stage of the lake. Its width at the water sur- 
face is 290 feet. Avith a minimum depth of 22 feet. 

The Chairman. Is it that wide through the rock? 

Mr. Randolph. Xo, sir; when we come to Willow Springs we 
strike the rock section, which is 14.95 miles long. There the sides of 
our channel are vertical. They are cut with channeling machines 
through the solid rock, and where the solid rock is overlaid by earth 
masonry, walls are built to a height of 5 feet above Chicago datum. 
Chicago datum is the low water of 1847. There Avas a plane of ref- 
erence established by the engineer who built the old Illinois and 
Michigan Canal, and it so happened that it coincided with the low 
water of 1847, and is always spoken of as the low water of 1847. The 
dimensions of the rock channel were such that it had a capacity for 
about 850.000 cubic feet of water per minute flow. So we took in the 
rock channel the 4.000 additional cubic feet which we asked for the 
Calumet region. 

Senator Morgan. Four thousand cubic feet per second ? 

Mr. Randolph. Four thousand cubic feet per second. We asked 
for that improvement. 

Senator Bacon. Let me ask you a question without interrupting 
you. You say it has a minimum depth of 22 feet ? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. 

Senator Bacon. That is, with the present flow of water, less than 
5,000 feet per second ? 

Mr. Randolph. No, sir ; there is a hydraulic condition there which 
gives you a greater depth with a small flow than you have with a 
large flow. As you increase the flow, you increase the hydraulic 
slope. At the present time, with our small flow, the hydraulic slope 
is much less than the bottom. Consequently the depth is not much 
greater with the large flow than with the small flow. 

Senator Bacon. The current would be more rapid? 

Mr. Randolph. The current avouIcI be more rapid with the large 
flow. 

At the present time Ave are extending this channel from Lockport 
4 miles. There is a drop, 2 miles beloAv our present end of the chan- 
nel, of M feet. There we are putting in a lock so as to continue the 
navigation oA^er the old Illinois and Michigan Canal. We hope and 
believe that the Government AA^ill carry on AAdiat we have commenced. 
This waterAA'ay through the Illinois Valley has been talked of for 
many, many generations. There has been a project Avhich has been 
looked for and hoped for. The great obstacle has been cutting 



16 PRESERVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 

through the divide between the watershed at Lake Michigan and the 
Illinois Valley. We have cut through that divide. We have made 
the waterway possible. Our channel is equipped with movable 
bridges. The law under which we operate requires us to ^equip 
those bridges and open the channel to navigation in 1907. So 
that after those bridges are equipped with operating machiner}^ — 
they are built to operate now; it is simply the operating machinery 
that is required — any vessel which floats in Lake Michigan can go 
down to the end of our channel, 30 miles. 

Senator Lodge. And there it. joins the Illinois River? 

Mr. Randolph. And there it joins the Desplaines River. Then 20 
miles farther the Desplaines unites with the Kankakee and forms the 
Illinois River. 

Senator Lodge. How much water have you in the Desplaines River? 

Mr. Randolph. The Desplaines River is a fluctuating stream. In 
some seasons the flow is so small that it will pass through a 6-inch 
pipe; at other times it is a roaring torrent and carries 800,000 cubic 
feet a minute. 

Senator Bacon. That is not true, with respect to a 6-inch pipe, of 
this channel ? 

Mr. Randolph. Oh, no, sir ; the channel and the Desplaines River 
do not iniite until they get to Lockport. 

Senator Bacon. I did not know that, 

Mr. Randolph. The highest point in the divide between the water- 
shed at Lake Michigan and the watershed at the Illinois Valley was 
11,32 feet above the Chicago datum. 

Senator Foraker. Will not the emptying out of the drainage canal 
into the Desplaines River increase the volume in the Desplaines? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes ; from where they come together. 

Senator Foraker, Sufficiently to partly overcome the difficulty of 
navigation ? 

Mr, Randolph. That could not be navigable without locks, because 
the declivity is so very great. It will be necessary to jDut locks in 
there. 

Senator Foraker. Has there been any estimate of the cost to im- 
prove the Desplaines? 

]Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir; there has been an estimate of the cost of 
improving the Desplaines and Illinois rivers. 

Senator Money, What is the distance between the Desplaines and 
the Illinois River? 

Mr. Randolph, The distance is about 20 miles. 

Senator Money, That would have to be canalized, would it not? 

Mr^ Randolph, Yes, sir. The Illinois is formed by the Desplaines 
and Kankakee rivers together. 

Senator Lodge. The Desplaines River is not now navigable, is it? 

Mr, Randolph, Xo, 

Senator Foraker, How far is it from the junction of the Kankakee 
and the Desplaines to the Mississippi River? 

Mr, Randolph. It is about 290 miles, I think. 

Senator Lodge, Is the Illinois navigable ? 

Mr. Randolph, The Illinois is navigable for boats drawing 5 feet 
of water. 

Senator Bacon, You speak of that as the river distance ? 

Mr. Randolph, That is the river distance. 



PEESERVATION OF NIAGAEA FALLS. 17 

Senator Foraker. You said an estimate had been made of the cost 
of improving the Illinois and the Desplaines rivers down to the 
Mississippi. Can you tell what that amounts to ? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. Something over two years ago Congress 
passed a bill authorizing a survey of that river with a view of making 
a navigable channel to connect with the Sanitary District Canal. I 
have seen an advance copy of that report. It will soon be in the 
hands of Congress. The estimate for improving the Illinois River 
from the end of our channel to Grafton is twenty-one million five 
hundred and odd thousand dollars. The total estimate for carrjdng 
a navigable channel through to St. Louis is thirty-one million and 
some hundred thousand dollars. I don't remember the fractions. 

Senator Money. "Wlien did you see that ? 

Mr. Randolph. I have seen an advance copy of it. 

Senator Foraker. He says it will be in the hands of Congress in a 
short time. 

Senator Money. But I wanted to know when he saw it. 

Mr. Randolph. The State of Illinois, at the last session of the 
legislature, instructed the governor to appoint a commission, known 
as the " internal improvement commission," to take up this question 
of waterways and see what could be done in conjunction with the 
Government or any other body for this improvement. The governor 
has appointed that commission, and I have the honor of being the 
chairman of the commission. So it now interests me very materially. 

Senator Lodge. With your drainage canal running to the Des- 
plaines. that, of course, gives the Desplaines a larger flow of water? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes. 

Senator Foraker. How many locks will be necessary from where 
you reach the Desplaines down to its junction with the Kankakee? 

Mr. Randolph. I think this report calls for 11 locks — not at the 
junction of the Kankakee, because you would have to canalize the 
Illinois River down as far as Utica. Then from Utica on you have 
227 miles. No locks are necessary in that stretch. It can be deep- 
ened by hydraulic dredging. 

Senator Foraker. How far is LTtica below the junction? 

The Chairman. It is not more than an inch a mile on the Illinois 
River. 

Senator Foraker. But he spoke of this estimate covering the im- 
provement of the Illinois River. I understood from your remarks 
that it did not cover the expense of locks on the Desplaines River. 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir; the estimate covered everything from the 
end of our channel through to Grafton. 

The Chairman. Just about an inch a mile? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir; just about an inch a mile from Grafton. 

Senator Foraker. Wliere is Grafton? 

Mr. Randolph. "VVliere the Illinois River comes into the Missis- 
sippi; and the proposition of the commission is to build a dam at 
Alton, on the Illinois side of the river. The project was worked up 
very closely to an approximate estimate we made on it ten years 
ago — -a little bit less than our approximate estimate. 

The Chairman. Now^, give your attention a little to the question 
of this water that is necessary to be taken from Niagara Falls and 
Avhat effect you think it will have. 

S. Doc. 393, 59-1 2 



18 PEESEEVATION OF NIAGAKA FALLS. 

Senator Money. Mr. Chairman, if yon will allow me right there, 
I object to nsing that term — taken from the Niagara Falls. It is 
not taking it from the Niagara Falls, 

The Chatrinian. I do not know whether or not that is true, but that 
is the allegation. 

Senator Money. I know; but it is misleading. 

Senator Bacon. We might insert the word " alleged " before it. 

Senator Money. How much taken from the Lakes? That would 
be proper. 

Senator Forakee. And Avhat is the effect on Lake Michigan? 

Senator Money. Yes; on the whole system of lakes down as far 
as the Niagara River. 

The CHAiRi\rAN. Mr. Randolph knows what Ave mean when we 
speak of the Niagara Falls. 

Senator Money. I know ; but it is misleading. It gets in the news- 
papers and creates an impression in the public mind that we are 
robbing Niagara Falls for this canal. If you stop the use of the 
water by the private companies there will be no complaint of this 
thing at all. 

Mr. Randolph. You would never hear of this thing. Senator, 
some years ago Michael Hillcock, who was the commissioner of ways 
and communications in Russia, went over this work one day, and 
with him was the Russian consul at Chicago. This was some years 
before we opened the work. "V^Hien we got through, this Russian 
consul said: 

Well, I am very glad to have seen this, because I have spent the summer in 
Canada and they have been inveighing against this drainage canal, and showed 
me how much it lowered the lake. They proved to me it lowered it 2 feet. 

That was three years before we opened the channel. 

The Chairman. You had not used any water at all? 

Mr. Randolph. No water at all. So they were getting ready then 
to make the howl. 

As I said before, when we are taking 600,000 cubic feet per 
minute, we are only taking 4^ per cent of the flow which passes 
through the St. Clair River, and it seems to me impossible that that 
should have any appreciable effect upon Lake Michigan. I made 
some calculations on this subject some years ago, and if I had had my 
wits about me, I would have gathered them up before I left home, 
but I have so many figures to deal with that I can not begin to carry 
them all in my mind. If j^ou care to have me look up those things, 
I can forward them to you. 

The Chairman. We would be glad to have them inserted in this 
testimony. 

Mr. Randolph. I will look up those things as soon as I return to 
Chicago. 

Senator Money. Mr. Randolph, if you are ready for a question, 
I would like to ask you in regard to the capacity of those pumps you 
spoke of. When you say 300,000 gallons per minute, do you mean 
the plant or one pump ? 

Mr. Rx\ND0LPH. One single pump. 

Senator Money. And there are six pumps? 

Mr, Randolph, No ; there are two that throw that amount. Then 
there are two which throw only 75,000 cubic feet per second. 

Senator Money. Which are the two water pumps? 



PRESERVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 19 

Mr. Randolph. Those that throw 300,000 gallons. 

Senator Money. Will you permit me to make a suggestion to you ? 

Mr. Randolph. Certainly. 

Senator Money. You know your business a great deal better than 
I do, but if you would transfer your observations of the St. Clair 
to the Niagara River, and see what effect the outtake of your drain- 
age system has upon the flow in the Niagara instead of the St. Clair, 
I think it would be a more accurate estimate, because it would come 
nearer showing what damage was done. That body of water has to go 
through evaporation in Lakes St. Clair and Erie before it gets down 
to Niagara. If you get the flow of cubic feet per second in the Niagara 
River instead of the St. Clair, and compare it with that, it would give, 
I think, a correct idea of the extent to which it would really affect 
it, if it affects it at all. 

Mr. Randolph. My impression is that the flow of the Niagara 
River at the natural bridge is 222,400 cubic feet per second. 

Senator Foraker. About the same as the St. Clair, then? 

Mr. Randolph. Very nearly. You see, there are very few inflow- 
ing streams between. 

Senator Money. And they are balanced by evaporation ? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes. 

Senator Money. That is an important fact to know, I think. 

Senator Foraker. Yes. I should think you would have to take 
into consideration the evaporation over the whole of that area from 
Chicago around to Niagara ; and also, as an offset to that, the inflow 
from these tributary streams. 

Senator Money. Oh, yes. 

The Chairman. If this proposed navigable waterway to the Mis- 
sissippi River and on to St. Louis should be constructed, how much 
additional flow of water would that make necessary ? 

Mr. Randolph. The rejDort of this Commission shows that the flow 
of 10,000 cubic feet per second is ample for a channel of 14 feet depth. 

Senator Money. That would be all that would be required, too. 

The Chairman. It does not require a very great amount of water 
above what you have here estimated. 

Mr. Randolph. But I hope. Senators, you will all stand for making 
the lock sills at least 20 feet deep to provide for anything that may 
happen in the future. It would not add very much to the cost. 

Senator Morgan. You require for the drainage canal now 10,000 
cubic feet per second ? 

Mr. Randolph. That is what we require for the Chicago project 
proper through the Chicago River. 

Senator Morgan. And 4,000 for the Calumet? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. 

Senator Morgan. Is 14,000 the tx)tal for the drainage business? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. 

Senator Morgan. And the question, of course, is hoAv much that 
will lower the lake. 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. 

Senator Morgan. Lake Michigan is how long ? 

Mr. Randolph. I think it is 300 miles from the lower end of the 
lake to Mackinac. 

Senator Morgan. What is the average breadth? 

Mr. Randolph. About 62 miles. 

Mr. Morgan. What is the average depth in it ? 



20 PRESERVATION OF NIAGARA FALLS. 

Senator Bacon. Nine hundred feet, is it not? I am guessing at it. 

Mr. Randolph. I think it is more than that. 

Senator Morgan. You might as well talk about lowering the At- 
lantic Ocean bj^ taking 14,000 cubic feet per second out of it as to 
talk of lowering Lake Michigan. I want to know this: Here are 
some works that have been put in at Niagara and some are proposed 
to be put in. 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. 

Senator Morgan. Have some of those works that have been put in 
at Niagara, according to the engineers, lowered Lake Michigan a 
fraction of an inch ? 

Mr. Randolph. No, sir; those works have not affected Lake Michi- 
gan in any way. 

Senator Morgan. It seems to me that would settle the question. 

The Chairman. That is true so far as we are concerned, but the 
question is in regard to lowering Niagara by the use of water by these 
manufacturing establishments. 

Senator Money. That is right at the spot. 

The Chairman. It is nearly 12 o'clock. Have you finished your 
statement, Mr. Randolph ? 

Mr. Randolppi. I am about through. I am ready to answer any 
questions, provided I am able to do so. 

Senator McCreary. I want to ask Mr. Randolph a question. I 
noticed in the report of the engineers the statement that the total 
quantity of water to be taken from the Niagara River by works now 
authorized is 60,000 cubic feet. You are familiar with this report? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. 

Senator McCreary (reading) : 

Of this amount 26,700 cubic feet is to be talven on tlie American side and the 
remainder, 34,200 cubic feet, on the Canadian side — that is, 27 per cent of the 
average discharge and 33 per cent of the low-water discharge of the Niagara 
River will cease to pass over the falls when these works are completed and in 
full operation. 

Then it says: 

The water taken on the Canadian side below the crest of the rapids will 
affect the horseshoe fall alone. If all that taken on the American side should 
affect the American fall alone, it would practically leave it dry. 

I desire to hear you on that point. 

Mr. Randolph. That is an impossible condition. The water is 
taken on the American side considerably above where the divide 
comes, where Goat Island divides the two falls; so that it is simply 
a supposition that if this thing should happen the American falls 
would go dry. 

Senator McCreary.. What appreciable effect at present has the con- 
struction of these various works had upon the volume of water pass- 
ing over the falls ? 

Mr. Randolph. The works on the Canadian side are not yet com- 
pleted. There are only two of them in partial operation, so that we 
have had no opportunity to see what actual operation does effect. 

Senator McCreary. Can you give an opinion ? Have you made an 
estimate as to what effect these works already finished have upon the 
falls? 

Senator Morgan. Let me ask you this: Was not that drainage 
canal in Chicago built entirely by contract ? 



PKESEKVATIOlSr OP NIAGAEA FALLS. 



21 



Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir ; entirely. 

Senator Morgak. By contracts let for the length of a mile? 

Mr. Eandolph. It was divided up into sections approximately a 
mile in lengih, and one contracting firm had 5 miles — five sections. 
That is the largest contract. 

Senator Morgan. Neither the city of Chicago nor the State of Illi- 
nois undertook to do the work ? 

Mr. Eandolph. Xo, sir. 

Senator McCreary. Mr. Randolph, that is the only question I de- 
sire to ask you. If you can make any statement to the committee as 
to what effect the completion of these works will have on the water 
passing over the falls I would like to know it. 

Mr. Randolph. I am satisfied, from my observation there, that 
there would be an appreciable diminution of the flow. 

Senator McCreary. An appreciable diminution? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. On both the American side and the Ca- 
nadian side there is a long stretch of very shallow water approaching 
the falls. I think that shallow water would be reduced so as to leave 
that bare. The great volume would go right into the fairway of the 
gulch. 

Senator McCreary. So that the works already constructed are al- 
ready interfering with the quantity of water that passes over the 
Niagara Falls, and when completed it will be very appreciable ? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. 

Senator Clark, of Montana. Would it not detract very largely 
from the grandeur and beauty of the scenery ? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes, sir. 

Senator Lodge. How much would the flow be increased by the 
abolition of the tunnels in the Chicago River ? 

Mr. Randolph. The flow through our channel ? 

Senator Lodge. Through your channel. 

Mr. Randolph. It would enable us to complete our cross section 
and give us the 480.000 which we want to get through that branch. 

Senator Lodge. It would increase the flow? 

Mr. Randolph. Yes. sir. 



APPENDIX. 



Data concerning the Cheat Lakes. 
[Furnished by Mr. Randolph.] 





Supe- 
rior. 


Michi- 
gan. 


Huron. 


St. Clair. 


Erie. 


Length of steamer track miles.. 

Breadth... do — 

Area of water surface square miles. . 

Area drained do 

Total area of basin do 

Depth, maximum, recorded bv lake survey . feet. . 


383 
160 

31,800 

48,600 

80,400 

1,012 

28 

602.29 

20.89 

75,000 

15,500 

206,400 

208,600 


321 

118 

22, 400 

45, 700 

08,100 

870 

33 

581.35 


220 

101 

23,200 

52, 1(H) 

75,300 

750 

32 

581.40 


17 
24 

445 
6,335 

6,780 


237 

57 

9,932 

24,480 

34,412 

210 


Rainfall, average yearly... inches.. 

Mean surface above tide at New York City (av- 
erage 45 years. 1860-1904) feet.. 


35 


36 
572. 61 




326 


Discharge per second cubic feet. . 

Increase discharge for each 1-foot rise do — 

Discharge of St. Clair River, per second.. do 


(a) 
(a) 


(a) 


208,600 


215,000 
23,000 

























"Not known. 



"22 PRESERVATION OP NIAGARA FALLS, 

The foregoing tables are collated from Bulletin No. 15, Survey of Northern 
and Northwestern Lakes, United States Engineer Corps, dated April 15, 1905. 
From the table of discharges it is evident that of the total volume of flow 
entering the St. Clair River (206,400 cubic feet per second) 131,400 cubic feet 
must be effluent from Lakes Huron and Michigan. The water areas of these 
two lakes vary only 800 square miles, but the watershed of Lake Huron is the 
greatest by G,600 square miles. 

The rainfall of Lake Michigan, however, is greater by 1 inch per annum than 
that of Lake Huron, hence a guess that 45 per cent of the increased flow over 
the discharge from Lake Superior comes from Lake Michigan and 55 per cent 
from Lake Huron seems consistent with the probabilities. Taking the area of 
Lake Michigan as given, 22,400 square miles, and assuming that rainfall, inflow, 
and evaporation were alike suspended, we find that with a withdrawal of 14,000 
cubic feet per second 1.41 years would be required to lower the lake 1 foot. 

This calculation is : Area 22,400 square miles multiplied by 27,878,400 square 
feet (area of 1 square mile) equals 624,476,160,000 cubic feet for 1 foot of 
depth. The withdrawal for one year at the rate of 14,000 cubic feet per second 
is 441,504,000,000 cubic feet, which, used as a divisor, gives 1.41 years, as al)()ve. 
The distance from Chicago to Buffalo by lake routes is 890 miles. 

The Niagara River drops 38.06 feet in the first 22 miles of its length, ending 
at Schlosser's dock ; from there to the crest of the falls it drops 48 feet. 

o 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



014 222 778 2 ^ 



